Self-efficacy was defined as “people’s judgments of their capabilities to organize and execute courses of action required to attain designed types of performance” (Bandura, 1986; p.391). Bandura (1993) stated that individuals’ behaviors, feelings, and thinking are influenced from their self-efficacious beliefs. Past research showed that students’ self-efficacy has strong influence on their academic achievement (Bandura, Barbaranelli, Caprara, & Pastorelli, 1996; Britner & Pajares, 2006; Klassen & Kuzucu, 2009; Linnenbrink & Pintrich, 2002; Schunk & Pajares, 2005; Yildirim, 2012). Namely, students who have higher confidence in their capabilities for mastering a given task are more likely to be successful (Bandura et al. 1996). Over the years, there has been a grooving body of research that examining students’ self-efficacy. The role of self-efficacy in students’ learning and the factors that are potential to influence students’ self-efficacy are the two main questions of these studies. The focus of the present study is based on the second research strand. Students spend a lot of time in the classroom. Although quality of classroom environment and teachers are most potent variables to influence students’ efficacy beliefs, only a few studies empirically examined the relationship of self-efficacy with perceived classroom learning environment (e.g., Dorman, 2001; Dorman, Adams, & Ferguson, 2003; Dorman, Fisher, & Waldrip, 2006) and with teacher effectiveness (e.g., Kurien, 2011; Stuart, 2006). Thus, to extend the knowledge about the factors effecting students self-efficacy is expected to be useful to increase students understanding and reach educational goals.

In the present study, these subjects were examined in science domain. Because, science is one of the most important subjects of the elementary education in Turkey. Howeover, results international exams such as TIMSS and PISA revealed that Turkish students’ achievement scores in science are lower than the avarage score of the all countries (Ministry of National Education [MONE], 2003; 2005; 2010; 2011). Therefore, it is important to investigate the factors affecting students’ efficacy beliefs in learning science. Accordingly, the research questions of these study are:

1)      To what extent do students in different classes vary in self-efficacy for learning science?

2)      To what extent do class (teacher) level variables (i.e., Gender, Experience, Efficacy for Student Engagement, Efficacy for Instructional Strategies, Efficacy for Classroom Management, Job Satisfaction, Emotional Exhaustion, Personal Accomplishment, and Implicit Theory of Science Ability) predict students’ self-efficacy in learning science?

3)      To what extent do student variables in terms of Gender and perception of classroom learning environment (i.e., Student Cohesiveness, Teacher Support, Involvement, Investigation, Task Orientation, Cooperation, and Equity) predict students’ self-efficacy in learning science?

4)      To what extent do class (teacher) level variables influence the relationship between students’ self-efficacy and perception of classroom learning environment (i.e., Student Cohesiveness, Teacher Support, Involvement, Investigation, Task Orientation, Cooperation, and Equity)?

Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. Bandura, A. (1993). Perceived self-efficacy in cognitive development and functioning. Educational Psychologist, 28(2), 117-148. Bandura, A., Barbaranelli, C., Caprara, G. V., & Pastorelli, C. (1996). Multifaceted impact of self-efficacy beliefs on academic functioning. Child Developent, 67(3), 1206-1222. Britner, S. L., & Pajares, F. (2006). Sources of science self-efficacy beliefs of middle school students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(5), 485-499. Dorman, J. P. (2001). Associations between classroom environment and academic efficacy. Learning Environment Research, 4, 243-257. Dweck, C., S. & Henderson, V., L. (1988). Theories of intelligence: Background and measures. Unpublished manuscript. Fraser, B. J., Fisher, D. L., & McRobbie, C. J. (1996l). Development, validation and use of personal and class forms of a new classroom environment instrument. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association (AERA). New York, NY. Hox, J. J. (2010). Multilevel analysis: Techniques and applications (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge. Klassen, R. M., & Kuzucu, E. (2009). Academic procrastination and motivation of adolcents in Turkey. Educational Psychology, 29(1), 69-81. Linnenbrink, E. A., & Pintrich, P. R. (2002). Motivation as an enabler for academic success. School Psychology Review, 31(3), 313-327. Maslach, C., & Jackson, S. E. (1881). The measurement of experienced burnout. Journal of Occupational Behavior, 2, 99-113. Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D. A. F., Garcia, T., & McKeachie, W.J. (1991). A manual for the use of the motivated strategies for learning questionnaire (MSLQ). Ann Arbor, MI: National Center for Research to Improve Postsecondary Teaching and Learning, University of Michigan. Raudenbush, S. W., & Bryk, A. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear model: Applications and data analysis method. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Schunk, D. H., & Pajares, F. (2005). Competence perceptions and academic functioning. In A. J. Elliot, & C. S. Dweck, Handbook of competence and motivation (pp. 85-104). New York: The Guilford Press. Skaalvik, E. M., & Skaalvik, S. (2010). Teacher self-efficacy and teacher burnout: A study of relations. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26, 1059-1069. Tschannen-Moran, M., & Woolfolk Hoy, A. (2001). Teacher efficacy: capturing an elusive construct. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17, 783-805. Yildirim, S. (2012). Teacher support, motivation, learning, strategy use, and achievement: A multilevel mediation model. The Journal of Experimental Education, 80(2), 150-172.